eMoov and other property firms resolve ad disputes with advertising watchdog

eMoov is one of several property firms to have ‘informally resolved’ disputes with the Advertising Standards Authority - usually achieved by amending a disputed ad to avoid a more formal judgement by the ASA.

Each week the authority sets out ‘formal decisions’ to accept or reject a complaint. In extreme circumstances this can lead to an advertisement effectively being banned. 

However, ‘informal resolution’ of cases usually involves a discussion between the ASA and the company about the nature of the complaint, and a voluntary agreement by the company to amend wording or accept that it would not continue to use disputed wording.

In the eMoov case, the complainant was concerned whether savings claims made via a savings calculator on eMoov's website were misleading; the complainant was also concerned about the use of VAT-exclusive prices. The ASA raised the issue with eMoov: “they agreed to amend their advertising” according to a statement from the authority.

There were three other property-related complaints, again all informally resolved.

Castle Carrick: A complainant was concerned whether the claims on the Castle Carrick website were misleading because they believed that the advertiser did not own the castle.

Hannells Ltd: The complainant was concerned that claims in the press ad for Hannells Ltd were misleading about the company and its price claims were misleading.

Robert Hyde: The complainant was concerned that claims made on the Elite Cottages website for holiday cottages were misleading.